EXPRESS: On ableism and anthropocentrism: a canine perspective on the workplace inclusion of disabled people

Despite growing attention for how disabled people become Othered in organizational settings and similar scholarly interest in the treatment of non-humans at work, no analysis so far has focused on the potential double marginalization that takes place when disabled people go to work with their service animal. In filling this void, this study draws attention to the embodied entanglement of ‘humanimal’ in a number of organizations where animals are unexpected. The study argues that the spatial, discursive and affective treatment of service dogs operates as a proxy for the in/exclusion of employees with mobility and visual impairments. This way, processes of ableism become masked as subtle and indirect performances towards non-human Others. Contributions are made towards several literatures by introducing the idea of a ‘proxy’ to help understand the different modes of peripheral inclusion of disabled employees via their legally accepted service animals, by bringing in the role of affect in workplace disablement, and finally by taking animal labour more seriously.

Information sharing when competing manufacturers adopt asymmetric channel in an e-tailer

<p style='text-indent:20px;'>This paper investigates the incentive for information sharing when competing manufacturers sell substitute products through the marketplace channel and the reseller channel respectively. Our analysis shows that the e-tailer's incentive to share information strongly depends on the platform fee, competition intensity, and different information sharing scenarios. If competition intensity is small, or competition intensity is large and the platform fee is enough large, the e-tailer has incentive to alone share information with the manufacturer who is from the marketplace channel; if competition intensity is moderate and the platform fee is small, or competition intensity is large but the platform fee is moderate, it has incentive to share information with both manufacturers; if competition intensity is large but the platform fee is small, it has no incentive to share information. The results also indicate that the double marginalization effect of information sharing is a promoting factor to share information under linear cost, which is different from previous literature. Additionally, we find that the main qualitative insights from the base model are robust even if one monopolist manufacturer employs both channels. And we also compare the incentive of information sharing under asymmetric channel with that under symmetric channel.</p>

The Implications of Vertical Strategic Interaction on Green Technology Investment in a Supply Chain

Numerous studies on supply chains have indicated that vertical strategic interactions usually involve the classical double marginalization problem, leading to a downward distortion in profitability. However, at present, the implications of vertical strategic interactions for green technology investment in a supply chain are not all that clear. In particular, such a vertical interaction not only can translate into profits between different parties, but usually also involves differentiated environmental performance. A question which arises is: who is the right undertaker for green technology investment in a supply chain, the supplier or retailer? To answer this question, we highlight the implications of vertical strategic interaction for green technology investment in a supply chain. To fill this gap, using a game-theoretic approach, we formulate two models: (a) Model M, in which an upstream manufacturer adopts technologies to meet consumer demand; and (b) Model R, where a retailer integrates environmental concerns into their supply chain decisions. We find that the retailer, who is closer to the customer, is the more effective undertaker for green technology investment, as this not only creates higher profitability for both parties, but also achieves a more sustainable scheme for our environment. When green technologies are invested in by the manufacturer, the double marginalization effect not only may downward-distort their economic performance but can also reduce the equilibrium of product greenness.

Equilibrium Analysis of Vertical Mergers

Vertical mergers are known to potentially create an incentive for the merged firm to raise the price of inputs it supplies to its rivals (raising rivals’ cost [RRC]). At the same time, vertical mergers are known to create efficiencies in the form of elimination of double marginalization (EDM). Competitive effects of vertical mergers are evaluated as the net effect of RRC and EDM. Conventional antitrust techniques treat the two effects—RRC and EDM—as separable and analyze each in isolation before evaluating their net effect. We show that in an equilibrium treatment, RRC and EDM are not separable; instead, they are inseparably linked because the size of EDM is an important determinant of the strength of the RRC incentive. When the link between EDM and RRC is taken into account, predicted price effects of a vertical merger can turn out to be significantly different relative to those predicted by conventional techniques. Under certain commonly used assumptions, a vertical merger may even create an incentive for the merged firm to lower its rivals’ cost. The precise price effect depends on two things: the shape of demand and the bargaining power of the upstream input supplier in its price negotiations with downstream firms.